NeTraMet (probably stupid) question

STEVENS@macc.wisc.edu Thu, 03 March 1994 20:31 UTC

Message-Id: <199403032025.AA05023@wugate.wustl.edu>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 1994 14:24:00 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: STEVENS@macc.wisc.edu
Reply-To: accounting-wg@wugate.wustl.edu
To: accounting-wg@wugate.wustl.edu
Errors-To: accounting-wg-errors@wugate.wustl.edu
Subject: NeTraMet (probably stupid) question

I have been struggling to observe the traffic to/from
one of our routers.  I put together the following
and absolutely nothing resulted:
 
=============================================
 
SET 5
RULES
destadjacentaddress & 255.255.255.255.255.255= aa-00-04-00-20-c5:
     goto, 3; # 1
null & 0 = 0 : fail,0;  # 2
#
SourcePeerType & 255= IP      : tally,1;                # 3
Null & 0 = 0                  : fail,0;                 # 4
#
ACTIONS
SourcePeerMask=255.255.255.255,
         DestPeerMask=255.255.255.255, SourcePeerType= IP; # 1
# SourceAdjacentMask=255.255.255.255.255.255,
#            DestAdjacentMask=255.255.255.255.255.255,
#            SourcePeerType=IP;                  # 2
FORMAT FlowRuleSet FlowIndex SourcePeerType  FlowType SourcePeerAddress
       DestPeerAddress FromPDUs ToPDUs;
 
 
This is result:
 
##NeTraMet v2.1:  -c0 -r collect.chem 128.104.252.17  3000 flows  starting at 13:06:13 Thu  3 Mar 94
#Format: flowruleset flowindex firsttime sourcepeertype flowtype sourcepeeraddress destpeeraddress frompdus topdus
#Time: 13:06:13 Thu  3 Mar 94 128.104.252.17 Flows from 1 to 666126
1 2 13 2 3 11.12.0.0 13.14.0.0 0 6061
1 3 13 7 3 41.42.0 43.44.0 0 7066
1 4 13 6 3 21.22.0.0 23.24.0.0 0 6454
1 5 13 5 3 31.32.0 33.34.0 0 707
1 6 13 12 3 3D-3E-00-00-00-00 3F-40-00-00-00-00 0 1982
 
======================================
 
Now you may have noticed that a second ACTION statement in my
RULE SET was 'commented out'.  Well, if I 'uncomment it' things work
much better.  The second ACTION statement is nowhere referenced!  It
does nothing!  But it makes things work!  A different ACTION statement
in its place that does not reference AdjacentAddresses does not
help.  So my question: where has the mental model that I have
put together gone wrong?  Why does that unused statement make it
work?  Here are the results:
 
=====================================================
##NeTraMet v2.1:  -c0 -r collect.chem 128.104.252.17  3000 flows  starting at 11:11:23 Thu  3 Mar 94
#Format: flowruleset flowindex firsttime sourcepeertype flowtype sourcepeeraddress destpeeraddress frompdus topdus
#Time: 11:11:23 Thu  3 Mar 94 128.104.252.17 Flows from 1 to 19014
1 2 13 7 3 41.42.0 43.44.0 0 17599
1 3 13 6 3 21.22.0.0 23.24.0.0 0 7721
1 4 13 2 3 11.12.0.0 13.14.0.0 0 20253
1 5 13 12 3 3D-3E-00-00-00-00 3F-40-00-00-00-00 0 5557
1 6 13 5 3 31.32.0 33.34.0 0 2301
5 7 7661 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.174.24 797 0
5 8 7880 2 2 128.105.11.27 144.92.102.118 1 0
5 9 7880 2 2 128.105.41.102 144.92.174.145 78 0
5 10 8611 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.102.35 13 0
5 11 8611 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.102.117 182 0
5 12 8819 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.10 2 0
5 13 9028 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.174.75 1 0
5 14 9132 2 2 128.104.0.0 128.104.26.1 4 0
5 15 9132 2 2 0.0.0.0 128.104.26.1 0 4
5 16 9445 2 2 128.104.110.40 144.92.174.150 192 0
5 17 10071 2 2 144.92.104.67 128.104.26.1 0 2
5 18 10719 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.174.101 4 0
5 19 10829 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.174.153 26 0
5 20 10829 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.188 1 0
5 21 11268 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.186 198 0
5 22 12174 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.16 2 0
5 23 12294 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.175.187 3 0
5 24 12399 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.111 1 0
5 25 12399 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.70 1 0
5 26 12399 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.71 1 0
5 27 13145 2 2 128.104.30.38 128.104.26.1 2 1
5 28 14424 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.90.210 12 0
5 29 15676 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.102.33 13 0
5 30 15781 2 2 128.104.30.17 144.92.174.77 3 0
5 31 15781 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.174.77 42 0
5 32 16615 2 2 128.104.30.12 128.104.26.1 24 25
5 33 16719 2 2 128.104.30.11 144.92.29.72 27 0
5 34 17032 2 2 128.104.235.190 144.92.90.16 15 0

NeTraMet (probably stupid) question STEVENS
Re: NeTraMet (probably stupid) question nevil